All of them to some extent. Maybe even a negative one. The only problem is how to apply torque to the rear wheel without the chain to see this effect. One way is to use an electric hub motor for example, an ebike with a hub motor would have to be evaluated in both modes.
The response is generated because of the longitudinal force applied to the rear axle (reaction force because of the force in the contact patch) that is not in line with the virtual pivot of the axle member.
If the virtual pivot is above the rear axle, the response will be antisquat. Of it is below, it will be pro squat. How much response will occur depends on the height of the CoG, wheelbase, etc.
The chain tension is just another layer on top of this behaviour, specific to chain driven vehicles (motorcycles and bikes).
All of them to some extent. Maybe even a negative one. The only problem is how to apply torque to the rear wheel without the chain...
All of them to some extent. Maybe even a negative one. The only problem is how to apply torque to the rear wheel without the chain to see this effect. One way is to use an electric hub motor for example, an ebike with a hub motor would have to be evaluated in both modes.
The response is generated because of the longitudinal force applied to the rear axle (reaction force because of the force in the contact patch) that is not in line with the virtual pivot of the axle member.
If the virtual pivot is above the rear axle, the response will be antisquat. Of it is below, it will be pro squat. How much response will occur depends on the height of the CoG, wheelbase, etc.
The chain tension is just another layer on top of this behaviour, specific to chain driven vehicles (motorcycles and bikes).
I'm sorry, you are simply incorrect in your analysis. Virtually all antisquat comes from chain tension, and without it every vehicle with pivot-based suspension squats under...
I'm sorry, you are simply incorrect in your analysis. Virtually all antisquat comes from chain tension, and without it every vehicle with pivot-based suspension squats under acceleration.
You are right, a design with a pivot above the imaginary line between your CoG and the rear axle would be ridiculous and impractical, which is why every design relies on chain growth for antisquat.
Here are three pivot locations, the rear axle, and CoG. Both the low and the high solid red pivots are below that before mentioned imaginary line. You can see with the force arrows, if the rear wheel accelerates the bike+rider forward, the force vector between the forward acceleration and downward gravity acceleration drives forwards and downwards. The only way for the suspension to extend is for the pivot location to be above this line. This is the source of acceleration squat. The pink pivot location is the only one that will extend (but its in an impractical location).
Again, this is without a chain. The whole point of chaingrowth is to generate chain tension to overcome this. Again, if this were not so, where is the point where a high pivot is high enough to generate antiquat on its own without a chain?
Sorry for the delayed response, it was a while until I could watch the World Cup so I had to stay off Vital to avoid spoilers
No, I am correct in my analysis. You need to look at the rear triangle as an isolated system in its own right, it can absolutely produce anti-squat in response to acceleration-inducing forces being applied to the rear axle, without needing to be above the line between the rear axle and the CoG. A high-pivot bike with an idler can certainly produce anti-squat even with the idler placed directly on the main pivot.
"I'm sorry, you are simply incorrect in your analysis. Virtually all antisquat comes from chain tension, and without it every vehicle with pivot-based suspension squats...
"I'm sorry, you are simply incorrect in your analysis. Virtually all antisquat comes from chain tension, and without it every vehicle with pivot-based suspension squats under acceleration."
No. At least not necessarily or not in all cases.
It's very well known that Red Bull has anti dive suspension geometry in the front (for braking) and anti squat geometry in the rear on their F1 car. At least they fine tuned it better than everyone else in the previous years, all the teams probably have it to some extent.
Antisquat (and antidive) geometry comes from cars, what bikes use is just an additional component due to chain drive that is very rarely used with cars. It's not something that was developed for bikes specifically. It comes from the motorcycle world. If anything, it's just so much more important than with other vehicles due to the nature of power delivery.
Primoz, we are talking about bikes here 😁 so the question stands, does any bike out there has any antisquat with chain removed? If yes, how...
Primoz, we are talking about bikes here 😁 so the question stands, does any bike out there has any antisquat with chain removed? If yes, how is the force generated?
Anti squat is just representation of how much the bike responds to acceleration, which there won't be much of without a chain but its a proportion, nor a magnitude. you could put the chain straight through the centre of a single pivot bike, and if that had a high enough pivot there would still be much greater than 100% anti squat. That's why very high pivot bikes put the chain above the pivot and still get around 120% AS
From the other site. Mechanical Transmission spotted.
From the other site. Mechanical Transmission spotted.
One can only hope that this makes it to production at the X0 level. That said, IMO the most overlooked flaw with the Transmission design is how rigid the direct mount design is and how that transfers forces into the cage. The rigitity of direct mount in conjuction with the stronger "clutch" means standard impacts to the cage are much more severe, resulting in a number of bent alloy cages and broken carbon cages. I have observed this among a group of friends I ride with and to date the damaged cage count is up to 7 or 8 among 4 people. This also seems to be an issue with other users based on some feedback I've read online.
Keeping this in mind:
1) What makes mechanical T-Type 'better' than the existing mechanical X01? Maybe the ability to quickly change the cage/clutch assembly?
2) Does the ability to withstand severe side impacts really matter, and is this ability lost in the mechanical design? IMO the cage will take the brunt of impacts on any derailleur.
The last piece of this that I've tried to figure out is how the mechanical version will 'slow' down shifts like the electronic version does in order to shift cleaner under load. Would this be designed into the derailleur, the shifter, or both?
Of the 7-8 cages your group has broken, do you know the distribution of what levels they were?For the aluminum cages, I have a theory that...
Of the 7-8 cages your group has broken, do you know the distribution of what levels they were?
For the aluminum cages, I have a theory that the GX is the strongest, followed by XX, and the X0 is weakest.
The XX and X0 seem to bend at the big cutout. The XX looks like it’s forged while the X0 looks stamped.
The GX doesn’t have the cutout and seems to hold up better.
Distribution is 3 X0 alloy cages and 4/5 XX cages.
I can't confirm exactly where the alloy cages are bending but in one instance the cage broke around the bottom pully and bent as a whole.
As for the carbon cages the majority have broken at the hole used to mount the upper pulley. One cage completely lost the lower 'guard' around the lower pulley.
At this point the distribution of derailleur levels being used among my friends is now 1 X0 and 3 XX SL. Any original XX cages were replaced with the XX SL carbon cage/clutch assembly.
One can only hope that this makes it to production at the X0 level. That said, IMO the most overlooked flaw with the Transmission design is...
One can only hope that this makes it to production at the X0 level. That said, IMO the most overlooked flaw with the Transmission design is how rigid the direct mount design is and how that transfers forces into the cage. The rigitity of direct mount in conjuction with the stronger "clutch" means standard impacts to the cage are much more severe, resulting in a number of bent alloy cages and broken carbon cages. I have observed this among a group of friends I ride with and to date the damaged cage count is up to 7 or 8 among 4 people. This also seems to be an issue with other users based on some feedback I've read online.
Keeping this in mind:
1) What makes mechanical T-Type 'better' than the existing mechanical X01? Maybe the ability to quickly change the cage/clutch assembly?
2) Does the ability to withstand severe side impacts really matter, and is this ability lost in the mechanical design? IMO the cage will take the brunt of impacts on any derailleur.
The last piece of this that I've tried to figure out is how the mechanical version will 'slow' down shifts like the electronic version does in order to shift cleaner under load. Would this be designed into the derailleur, the shifter, or both?
Regarding slowing down the shifts I’m guessing they’ll restrict the shifter to one click at a time like their ebike shifters, but beyond that I’m not so sure how they could slow down the shifts on a cable system.
crazy, I've only ever broken 1 Sram Derailleur and that was when gx 12spd first came out. since that time ive owned prob 50% of each brand (big S) and ive broken a heck of alot of Shimano derailleurs. Same with chains actually, never broken a Sram one but i've broken a few shimano ones. I've got 2 Transmission GX and they've seen some heavy abuse and shift awesome still.
Like i said im pretty 50/50 split with what brand i get so more certainly not fanboying anyone.
Distribution is 3 X0 alloy cages and 4/5 XX cages.I can't confirm exactly where the alloy cages are bending but in one instance the cage broke...
Distribution is 3 X0 alloy cages and 4/5 XX cages.
I can't confirm exactly where the alloy cages are bending but in one instance the cage broke around the bottom pully and bent as a whole.
As for the carbon cages the majority have broken at the hole used to mount the upper pulley. One cage completely lost the lower 'guard' around the lower pulley.
At this point the distribution of derailleur levels being used among my friends is now 1 X0 and 3 XX SL. Any original XX cages were replaced with the XX SL carbon cage/clutch assembly.
Have you checked the chain length? If you are in the smallest cog there should be daylight above the chain to the top pulley. I see a lot sram bikes with a chain that's 1 link too long which puts huge strain on the cage as well as poor shifting. In the lower gears the chain is pulling straight through that top pulley so the cage cant rotate and will instead try to bend. It also be at the wrong angle to the cassette for smooth shifting. Check if there's room to take a link out.
Broke/bent an XO knuckle. At the time a replacement XO wasn’t available in Canada, and was 3 months out. Found one XX replacement. Shits expensive, I think it was $230.
Distribution is 3 X0 alloy cages and 4/5 XX cages.I can't confirm exactly where the alloy cages are bending but in one instance the cage broke...
Distribution is 3 X0 alloy cages and 4/5 XX cages.
I can't confirm exactly where the alloy cages are bending but in one instance the cage broke around the bottom pully and bent as a whole.
As for the carbon cages the majority have broken at the hole used to mount the upper pulley. One cage completely lost the lower 'guard' around the lower pulley.
At this point the distribution of derailleur levels being used among my friends is now 1 X0 and 3 XX SL. Any original XX cages were replaced with the XX SL carbon cage/clutch assembly.
I'm sorry, you are simply incorrect in your analysis. Virtually all antisquat comes from chain tension, and without it every vehicle with pivot-based suspension squats under...
I'm sorry, you are simply incorrect in your analysis. Virtually all antisquat comes from chain tension, and without it every vehicle with pivot-based suspension squats under acceleration.
You are right, a design with a pivot above the imaginary line between your CoG and the rear axle would be ridiculous and impractical, which is why every design relies on chain growth for antisquat.
Here are three pivot locations, the rear axle, and CoG. Both the low and the high solid red pivots are below that before mentioned imaginary line. You can see with the force arrows, if the rear wheel accelerates the bike+rider forward, the force vector between the forward acceleration and downward gravity acceleration drives forwards and downwards. The only way for the suspension to extend is for the pivot location to be above this line. This is the source of acceleration squat. The pink pivot location is the only one that will extend (but its in an impractical location).
Again, this is without a chain. The whole point of chaingrowth is to generate chain tension to overcome this. Again, if this were not so, where is the point where a high pivot is high enough to generate antiquat on its own without a chain?
Sorry for the delayed response, it was a while until I could watch the World Cup so I had to stay off Vital to avoid spoilers
No, I am correct in my analysis. You need to look at the rear triangle as an isolated system in its own right, it can absolutely...
No, I am correct in my analysis. You need to look at the rear triangle as an isolated system in its own right, it can absolutely produce anti-squat in response to acceleration-inducing forces being applied to the rear axle, without needing to be above the line between the rear axle and the CoG. A high-pivot bike with an idler can certainly produce anti-squat even with the idler placed directly on the main pivot.
When I read this (welcomed) derailment I wonder if I even know bikes, I thought it was as simple as this; bike has two wheels, is funner with gravity, unless gravity is opposing direction of movement. Buttt it appears they are a little more complex than that.
Regarding slowing down the shifts I’m guessing they’ll restrict the shifter to one click at a time like their ebike shifters, but beyond that I’m not...
Regarding slowing down the shifts I’m guessing they’ll restrict the shifter to one click at a time like their ebike shifters, but beyond that I’m not so sure how they could slow down the shifts on a cable system.
I guess you could have a spring somewhere between the cable clamp and the mech. You push the shifter, it stretches the spring until the cassette rotates to a shift point and then the tension in the spring moves the mech.
One can only hope that this makes it to production at the X0 level. That said, IMO the most overlooked flaw with the Transmission design is...
One can only hope that this makes it to production at the X0 level. That said, IMO the most overlooked flaw with the Transmission design is how rigid the direct mount design is and how that transfers forces into the cage. The rigitity of direct mount in conjuction with the stronger "clutch" means standard impacts to the cage are much more severe, resulting in a number of bent alloy cages and broken carbon cages. I have observed this among a group of friends I ride with and to date the damaged cage count is up to 7 or 8 among 4 people. This also seems to be an issue with other users based on some feedback I've read online.
Keeping this in mind:
1) What makes mechanical T-Type 'better' than the existing mechanical X01? Maybe the ability to quickly change the cage/clutch assembly?
2) Does the ability to withstand severe side impacts really matter, and is this ability lost in the mechanical design? IMO the cage will take the brunt of impacts on any derailleur.
The last piece of this that I've tried to figure out is how the mechanical version will 'slow' down shifts like the electronic version does in order to shift cleaner under load. Would this be designed into the derailleur, the shifter, or both?
Regarding slowing down the shifts I’m guessing they’ll restrict the shifter to one click at a time like their ebike shifters, but beyond that I’m not...
Regarding slowing down the shifts I’m guessing they’ll restrict the shifter to one click at a time like their ebike shifters, but beyond that I’m not so sure how they could slow down the shifts on a cable system.
This has been discussed previously but the TLDR is that T-type doesn't slow the shifts down or know when to shift, it's just a byproduct of where the ramps are in the cassette.
Smashing through gears on a mechanical T-type won't shift faster or slower, as the cassette is the same and there are only so many ramps to engage the shift.
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the prototype IMO, but maybe he was more focused on wrapping up the CrankWorx title.
If they drop a motorized version of this, I'll be on it like flies on doodoo. Wonder if we'll see a motorized version first, or a 2 Chainz Firebird?
The industry as a whole seems to be asleep at the wheel with regards to super enduro/DH e bikes. Just go full power with suspension that can actually handle a heavy bike without turning into a noodle. Drop a few pounds when solid state inevitably shows up and call it a day. Meanwhile the flavor-of-the week Chinesium E-Moto's are selling like hotcakes.
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the...
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the prototype IMO, but maybe he was more focused on wrapping up the CrankWorx title.
If they drop a motorized version of this, I'll be on it like flies on doodoo. Wonder if we'll see a motorized version first, or a 2 Chainz Firebird?
The industry as a whole seems to be asleep at the wheel with regards to super enduro/DH e bikes. Just go full power with suspension that can actually handle a heavy bike without turning into a noodle. Drop a few pounds when solid state inevitably shows up and call it a day. Meanwhile the flavor-of-the week Chinesium E-Moto's are selling like hotcakes.
I actually download the enduro mag app to read about it. Looks like a sweet bike.
I dont get why manufacture's aren't producing DH ebikes. This makes so much more sense then a 130 ebike. I want to ride my shuttle trails on these and not shuttle.
Maybe that would be to much like a moto 😱 with a dual crown and coil shock + a full face.
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the...
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the prototype IMO, but maybe he was more focused on wrapping up the CrankWorx title.
If they drop a motorized version of this, I'll be on it like flies on doodoo. Wonder if we'll see a motorized version first, or a 2 Chainz Firebird?
The industry as a whole seems to be asleep at the wheel with regards to super enduro/DH e bikes. Just go full power with suspension that can actually handle a heavy bike without turning into a noodle. Drop a few pounds when solid state inevitably shows up and call it a day. Meanwhile the flavor-of-the week Chinesium E-Moto's are selling like hotcakes.
I actually download the enduro mag app to read about it. Looks like a sweet bike. I dont get why manufacture's aren't producing DH ebikes. This makes...
I actually download the enduro mag app to read about it. Looks like a sweet bike.
I dont get why manufacture's aren't producing DH ebikes. This makes so much more sense then a 130 ebike. I want to ride my shuttle trails on these and not shuttle.
Maybe that would be to much like a moto 😱 with a dual crown and coil shock + a full face.
I am NOT an e-MTB guy, but e-DH makes an awful lot of sense. I'd much rather have folks self-shuttle with pedal assist.
I've seen a guy at Glorieta on one of the long-travel Pole e-bikes. Seemed like a good use case.
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the...
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the prototype IMO, but maybe he was more focused on wrapping up the CrankWorx title.
If they drop a motorized version of this, I'll be on it like flies on doodoo. Wonder if we'll see a motorized version first, or a 2 Chainz Firebird?
The industry as a whole seems to be asleep at the wheel with regards to super enduro/DH e bikes. Just go full power with suspension that can actually handle a heavy bike without turning into a noodle. Drop a few pounds when solid state inevitably shows up and call it a day. Meanwhile the flavor-of-the week Chinesium E-Moto's are selling like hotcakes.
I actually download the enduro mag app to read about it. Looks like a sweet bike. I dont get why manufacture's aren't producing DH ebikes. This makes...
I actually download the enduro mag app to read about it. Looks like a sweet bike.
I dont get why manufacture's aren't producing DH ebikes. This makes so much more sense then a 130 ebike. I want to ride my shuttle trails on these and not shuttle.
Maybe that would be to much like a moto 😱 with a dual crown and coil shock + a full face.
I am NOT an e-MTB guy, but e-DH makes an awful lot of sense. I'd much rather have folks self-shuttle with pedal assist.I've seen a guy...
I am NOT an e-MTB guy, but e-DH makes an awful lot of sense. I'd much rather have folks self-shuttle with pedal assist.
I've seen a guy at Glorieta on one of the long-travel Pole e-bikes. Seemed like a good use case.
As someone who's 200+ Lb's and rides an enduro bike on blue trails, I've come to the conclusion that I just prefer having more mechanical grip when I ride. I'm also a lazy climber, and I love how more travel allows you to smash through technical climbs while pedaling in a seated position. I've tried short travel bikes, and overall they just feel uncomfortable to me in comparision, and more demanding in technical terrain. I also crash way way more descending on short travel bikes with less grippy tires. Seems like a high price to pay for a little bit better climbing performance.
It seems that the new enduro is really close and probably the ubb one? The user manual is different to the one for the 2019-2023 models, as shown in the picture. And for the old model you have the updated seat stay in satin black with udh:
"For 2025, there is a new seatstay that uses the UDH derailleur hanger. All other compatibility information remains the same. The new seatstay is backwards compatible with 2020-2024 model year frames and fits all sizes. The part number is S245000013, with only a satin black colorway available. "
When it comes to derailleur cages, there really is only one way to do things. Two pulley wheels on an arm. If I’m not mistaken our cage is the only one where the structural arm traverses from the outside of the upper pulley to the inside of the lower pulley. We wanted it to at least be different in some way. Kogel cages maybe look more similar for what it’s worth.
The reason this annoys me, though, is we developed a novel chain guide a few years ago. The design is actually patented in the US. That design was copied. I don’t mind seeing aspects of a novel design being taken and improved upon, but copying isn’t cool.
All of them to some extent. Maybe even a negative one. The only problem is how to apply torque to the rear wheel without the chain to see this effect. One way is to use an electric hub motor for example, an ebike with a hub motor would have to be evaluated in both modes.
The response is generated because of the longitudinal force applied to the rear axle (reaction force because of the force in the contact patch) that is not in line with the virtual pivot of the axle member.
If the virtual pivot is above the rear axle, the response will be antisquat. Of it is below, it will be pro squat. How much response will occur depends on the height of the CoG, wheelbase, etc.
The chain tension is just another layer on top of this behaviour, specific to chain driven vehicles (motorcycles and bikes).
Yep, that's what I said.
No, I am correct in my analysis. You need to look at the rear triangle as an isolated system in its own right, it can absolutely produce anti-squat in response to acceleration-inducing forces being applied to the rear axle, without needing to be above the line between the rear axle and the CoG. A high-pivot bike with an idler can certainly produce anti-squat even with the idler placed directly on the main pivot.
Anti squat is just representation of how much the bike responds to acceleration, which there won't be much of without a chain but its a proportion, nor a magnitude. you could put the chain straight through the centre of a single pivot bike, and if that had a high enough pivot there would still be much greater than 100% anti squat. That's why very high pivot bikes put the chain above the pivot and still get around 120% AS
who said that??
Anyway, then go for the Xfusion(much better) and super R+D system 😄😄
Sorry, I don't get the point about "supporting" bike brands. This a discussion about bike features...then each one will decide what to buy.
Giant Trance X
https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/trance-x-1
You guys are so serious about mountain bikes. I'm getting a good laugh this morning. 😄
I experience accelerative phenomena with no chain all the time. Allow me a few minutes to generate some graphs.
One can only hope that this makes it to production at the X0 level. That said, IMO the most overlooked flaw with the Transmission design is how rigid the direct mount design is and how that transfers forces into the cage. The rigitity of direct mount in conjuction with the stronger "clutch" means standard impacts to the cage are much more severe, resulting in a number of bent alloy cages and broken carbon cages. I have observed this among a group of friends I ride with and to date the damaged cage count is up to 7 or 8 among 4 people. This also seems to be an issue with other users based on some feedback I've read online.
Keeping this in mind:
1) What makes mechanical T-Type 'better' than the existing mechanical X01? Maybe the ability to quickly change the cage/clutch assembly?
2) Does the ability to withstand severe side impacts really matter, and is this ability lost in the mechanical design? IMO the cage will take the brunt of impacts on any derailleur.
The last piece of this that I've tried to figure out is how the mechanical version will 'slow' down shifts like the electronic version does in order to shift cleaner under load. Would this be designed into the derailleur, the shifter, or both?
Of the 7-8 cages your group has broken, do you know the distribution of what levels they were?
For the aluminum cages, I have a theory that the GX is the strongest, followed by XX, and the X0 is weakest.
The XX and X0 seem to bend at the big cutout. The XX looks like it’s forged while the X0 looks stamped.
The GX doesn’t have the cutout and seems to hold up better.
Distribution is 3 X0 alloy cages and 4/5 XX cages.
I can't confirm exactly where the alloy cages are bending but in one instance the cage broke around the bottom pully and bent as a whole.
As for the carbon cages the majority have broken at the hole used to mount the upper pulley. One cage completely lost the lower 'guard' around the lower pulley.
At this point the distribution of derailleur levels being used among my friends is now 1 X0 and 3 XX SL. Any original XX cages were replaced with the XX SL carbon cage/clutch assembly.
Regarding slowing down the shifts I’m guessing they’ll restrict the shifter to one click at a time like their ebike shifters, but beyond that I’m not so sure how they could slow down the shifts on a cable system.
crazy, I've only ever broken 1 Sram Derailleur and that was when gx 12spd first came out. since that time ive owned prob 50% of each brand (big S)
and ive broken a heck of alot of Shimano derailleurs.
Same with chains actually, never broken a Sram one but i've broken a few shimano ones.
I've got 2 Transmission GX and they've seen some heavy abuse and shift awesome still.
Like i said im pretty 50/50 split with what brand i get so more certainly not fanboying anyone.
Have you checked the chain length? If you are in the smallest cog there should be daylight above the chain to the top pulley. I see a lot sram bikes with a chain that's 1 link too long which puts huge strain on the cage as well as poor shifting. In the lower gears the chain is pulling straight through that top pulley so the cage cant rotate and will instead try to bend. It also be at the wrong angle to the cassette for smooth shifting. Check if there's room to take a link out.
Broke/bent an XO knuckle. At the time a replacement XO wasn’t available in Canada, and was 3 months out. Found one XX replacement. Shits expensive, I think it was $230.
I have yet to bend my XX cage but it is really flimsy. It appears that SRAM has moved the sacrificial part from hanger to cage. There is a solution however: https://cascadecomponents.bike/products/transmission-derailleur-cage
This cascade cage appears to be pretty burly and costs slightly more than OEM. Your friends should try going this route when they break the next one.
When I read this (welcomed) derailment I wonder if I even know bikes, I thought it was as simple as this; bike has two wheels, is funner with gravity, unless gravity is opposing direction of movement. Buttt it appears they are a little more complex than that.
I guess you could have a spring somewhere between the cable clamp and the mech. You push the shifter, it stretches the spring until the cassette rotates to a shift point and then the tension in the spring moves the mech.
Why is no one talking about this ?
This has been discussed previously but the TLDR is that T-type doesn't slow the shifts down or know when to shift, it's just a byproduct of where the ramps are in the cassette.
Smashing through gears on a mechanical T-type won't shift faster or slower, as the cassette is the same and there are only so many ramps to engage the shift.
I'm super interested in reading some reviews of this bike. B.K seemed to do better at World Cups on the last production Phoenix compared to the prototype IMO, but maybe he was more focused on wrapping up the CrankWorx title.
If they drop a motorized version of this, I'll be on it like flies on doodoo. Wonder if we'll see a motorized version first, or a 2 Chainz Firebird?
The industry as a whole seems to be asleep at the wheel with regards to super enduro/DH e bikes. Just go full power with suspension that can actually handle a heavy bike without turning into a noodle. Drop a few pounds when solid state inevitably shows up and call it a day. Meanwhile the flavor-of-the week Chinesium E-Moto's are selling like hotcakes.
I actually download the enduro mag app to read about it. Looks like a sweet bike.
I dont get why manufacture's aren't producing DH ebikes. This makes so much more sense then a 130 ebike. I want to ride my shuttle trails on these and not shuttle.
Maybe that would be to much like a moto 😱 with a dual crown and coil shock + a full face.
I am NOT an e-MTB guy, but e-DH makes an awful lot of sense. I'd much rather have folks self-shuttle with pedal assist.
I've seen a guy at Glorieta on one of the long-travel Pole e-bikes. Seemed like a good use case.
As someone who's 200+ Lb's and rides an enduro bike on blue trails, I've come to the conclusion that I just prefer having more mechanical grip when I ride. I'm also a lazy climber, and I love how more travel allows you to smash through technical climbs while pedaling in a seated position. I've tried short travel bikes, and overall they just feel uncomfortable to me in comparision, and more demanding in technical terrain. I also crash way way more descending on short travel bikes with less grippy tires. Seems like a high price to pay for a little bit better climbing performance.
It seems that the new enduro is really close and probably the ubb one? The user manual is different to the one for the 2019-2023 models, as shown in the picture. And for the old model you have the updated seat stay in satin black with udh:
"For 2025, there is a new seatstay that uses the UDH derailleur hanger. All other compatibility information remains the same. The new seatstay is backwards compatible with 2020-2024 model year frames and fits all sizes. The part number is S245000013, with only a satin black colorway available. "
As much as I like cascade components, this cage is heavily inspired by fraezen cage that has been on the market for quite some time.
Don’t get me started.
Um... Why not?
When it comes to derailleur cages, there really is only one way to do things. Two pulley wheels on an arm. If I’m not mistaken our cage is the only one where the structural arm traverses from the outside of the upper pulley to the inside of the lower pulley. We wanted it to at least be different in some way. Kogel cages maybe look more similar for what it’s worth.
The reason this annoys me, though, is we developed a novel chain guide a few years ago. The design is actually patented in the US. That design was copied. I don’t mind seeing aspects of a novel design being taken and improved upon, but copying isn’t cool.